SRL Archive - Forum Guides

First off, I have been told I am a hard-ass on members applications. I'm sorry, but 9/10 of my votes are a no, and I'd love to see that changing. This tutorial has many examples, so I hope you can learn. Also, I have attached the best tutorials I could find on each subject, please look for the links! :)

Please note: I do not give anyone assurance that any code works, but all code here has been written by myself. Also, this is my PERSONAL voting style, use your discretion. Some agree others disagree, I am posting this as a learning tool.

Well, here is a list of some of the reasons why I vote no on SRL Members applications.

1. Attitude:
• It is key, bad attitude, no. Good attitude, Heck yes! I have voted no purely on attitude, as have others. A good attitude is your best bet into SRL members. Someone says they don't like something, ask how you can fix it. They don't like you, ask how you can fix it. Be helpful and courteous and you will get the same in return.
• How to become Respected at SRL
2. Sloppy Standards
• Standards, these are OFTEN over looked but provide key readabilities. They also can improve your code altogether and make it more efficient. This is also the main reason why I will vote NO! I am not adamant on standards, I won't vote no becuase you capitalize bold words, but sloppy standards make me look deeper, and I notice other falters. All in all, good rule of thumb, hide mistakes in pretty standards. :)
• Standards List
P.S. Anyone who I have helped teach will verify that the FIRST thing I tell them is to adopt correct standards, I refuse to read it if they are bad.
3. Large If statements
• These are when you see things like:

  if I = 0 then

else if I = 1 then else if I = 2 then else
• These are a key reason I vote no, something this big and long can be made faster and more efficient by using a simple case I of.

  case I of

0: Blah; 1: Blah; 2: Blah; else BiggerBlah; end;
• There are appropriate times for large amounts of if statements, for example:

  procedure Calibrate(Portal : String);

var I : Integer; AInfo : AlterInfo; P : TPoint; begin if not R_LoggedIn then Exit; Portal := LowerCase(Portal); AInfo := SetupPortalInfo(Portal); P := GetMyPos; if DistanceFrom(EdgeToAbyss[0]) < 2 then Players[CurrentPlayer].Loc := 'Banking : Glory Tele' else if ChargeGlory then Players[CurrentPlayer].Loc := 'Charging Glories' else if TileInBox(GetMyPos, 3089, 3488, 3098, 3499) then Players[CurrentPlayer].Loc := 'Banking : In Bank' else if FindMeOnPath(I, EdgeToAbyss, 10) then Players[CurrentPlayer].Loc := 'OnPath : EdgeToAbyss' else if InCircle(P.x, P.y, 3039, 4834, 17) then Players[CurrentPlayer].Loc := 'OnPath : AlterTPA' else if CheckNPCsByName('Abyssal') and InCircle(P.x, P.y, 3039, 4834, 40) then Players[CurrentPlayer].Loc := 'OnPath : OutPath' else if TileOnMM(AInfo.ATile) then Players[CurrentPlayer].Loc := 'AtAlter : ' + Portal else Players[CurrentPlayer].Loc := 'Lost'; Writeln('Player''s location is: ' + Players[CurrentPlayer].Loc); Disguise('Active Player: ' + Capitalize(LowerCase(Players[CurrentPlayer].Name)) +'; Loc: ' + Players[CurrentPlayer].Loc); end;Notice how every If statement has a different type of boolean statement. This cannot be made more efficient and is the best way available.
• Need more information on cases see this: Statements Tutorial
4. Inefficient Code.
• This is a large reason why I vote no. If I see code being repeated multiple times for no reason, then you need to change something.
• Option 1: Procedures / Functions If you find yourself repeating things multiple times, make it a procedure or a function. It saves lines, and looks a lot cleaner here is an example:

// Bad: //… if Left then begin iTime := GetTimeRunning; repeat Player := SmartGetFieldObject(0, MyPlayer); Result := SmartGetFieldInt(Player, CharAnim) > 0; SmartFreeObject(Player); Wait(20); RCC := RCC + Integer(Result); until (RCC = 2) or (GetTimeRunning - iTime > 500); Result := IsInteractingWithMe(Index) or RCC = 2; end; else if IsOptionMenuOpen then begin ChooseOption('ttack'); WWM; iTime := GetTimeRunning; repeat Player := SmartGetFieldObject(0, MyPlayer); Result := SmartGetFieldInt(Player, CharAnim) > 0; SmartFreeObject(Player); Wait(20); RCC := RCC + Integer(Result); until (RCC = 2) or (GetTimeRunning - iTime > 500); Result := IsInteractingWithMe(Index) or RCC = 2; end; //…

// Good:
function R_InFight : Boolean;

var
  Player, RCC, iTime : Integer;

begin
  iTime := GetTimeRunning;
  repeat
    Player := SmartGetFieldObject(0, MyPlayer);
    Result := SmartGetFieldInt(Player, CharAnim) > 0;
    SmartFreeObject(Player);
    Wait(20);
    RCC := RCC + Integer(Result);
  until (RCC = 2) or (GetTimeRunning - iTime > 500);
end;

//...
    if Left then
      Result := IsInteractingWithMe(Index) or R_InFight
    else
    if IsOptionMenuOpen then
    begin
      ChooseOption('ttack');
      WWM;
      Result := IsInteractingWithMe(Index) or R_InFight;
    end;
//...

• Option 2: Loops! Create a loop statement and use it to cycle through. Example:

  // Bad:

MakeCompass(IntToStr(180)); WaitRR(200, 300); P := Point(Points[1].x + Random(2) - (2), Points[1].y - Random(3)); if not TileOnMS(P, 20) then begin WalkToTile(P, 1, 0); R_Flag; end; P := TileToMS(P, 20); MMouse(P.x, P.y, 5, 5); WaitRR(80, 100); if IsUpText('limb') then MyMouse(['limb']); WaitWhileTele(2); WaitRR(400, 600); MakeCompass(IntToStr(360)); WaitRR(200, 300); P := Point(Points[1].x + Random(2) - (4), Points[1].y - Random(3)); if not TileOnMS(P, 20) then begin WalkToTile(P, 1, 0); R_Flag; end; P := TileToMS(P, 20); MMouse(P.x, P.y, 5, 5); WaitRR(80, 100); if IsUpText('limb') then MyMouse(['limb']); WaitWhileTele(2); WaitRR(400, 600);

// Good:
  for I := 1 to 2 do
  begin
    MakeCompass(IntToStr(180 * I));
    WaitRR(200, 300);
    P := Point(Points[1].x + Random(2) - (2 * (I - 1)), Points[1].y - Random(3));
    if not TileOnMS(P, 20) then
    begin
      WalkToTile(P, 1, 0);
      R_Flag;
    end;
    P := TileToMS(P, 20);
    MMouse(P.x, P.y, 5, 5);
    WaitRR(80, 100);
    if IsUpText('limb') then
      MyMouse(['limb']);
    WaitWhileTele(2);
    WaitRR(400, 600);
  end;

Notice the good and bad sections. The good has a loop and it is half the size, it uses some math and makes it much more efficient. Saves compiling times as well.
• Option 3: Combine Procedures! Instead of having 4 procedures to declare 4 DDTMs why not use one procedure to declare any of them? :)

  // Bad:

procedure BronzeBarD; var BColor: integer; SubPoints: array[0..3] of TDTMPointDef; MainPoint : TDTMPointDef; BarTDTM: TDTM; begin MainPoint.x:=68; MainPoint.y:=224; //… BarTDTM.MainPoint := MainPoint; BarTDTM.SubPoints := SubPoints; BarDTM := AddDTM(BarTDTM); end; procedure IronBarD; var BColor: integer; SubPoints: array[0..3] of TDTMPointDef; MainPoint : TDTMPointDef; BarTDTM: TDTM; begin MainPoint.x:=68; MainPoint.y:=224; //… BarTDTM.MainPoint := MainPoint; BarTDTM.SubPoints := SubPoints; BarDTM := AddDTM(BarTDTM); end; procedure SteelBarD; var BColor: integer; SubPoints: array[0..3] of TDTMPointDef; MainPoint : TDTMPointDef; BarTDTM: TDTM; begin MainPoint.x:=68; MainPoint.y:=224; //… BarTDTM.MainPoint := MainPoint; BarTDTM.SubPoints := SubPoints; BarDTM := AddDTM(BarTDTM); end;

// Good:
procedure BarD(Bar: string); //I could use just a DTM with a tol of 442, but this is more accurate

var
  BColor: integer;
  SubPoints: array[0..3] of TDTMPointDef;
  MainPoint : TDTMPointDef;
  BarTDTM: TDTM;

begin
  case Lowercase(bar) of
    'bronze': BColor := 1451311;
    'iron': BColor := 3223861;
    'steel': BColor := 4802895;
    'mith': BColor := 4008489;
    'addy': BColor := 2831658;
    'rune': BColor := 4274988;
    else
      begin
        Writeln('Bar Color was invalid choice.');
        exit;
      end;
  end;

  MainPoint.x:=68;
  MainPoint.y:=224;

  SubPoints[0].x:=82;
  SubPoints[0].y:=223;

  //...

  BarTDTM.MainPoint := MainPoint;
  BarTDTM.SubPoints := SubPoints;
  BarDTM := AddDTM(BarTDTM);
end;

5. Advanced Code:
• This is not a huge deal to me, but I do look for certain things:
• 1: TPAs: These are a highly recommended point. They are the current style of object finding and must be used correctly. Although Custom TPAs are not absolutely necessary, I look at them as a necessity, personally, here is an example, more advanced than necessary (Its my object finder):

  function NFindObj(Colors : TIntegerArray; UpTexts : TStringArray; w, h, minCount, Tol : Integer) : Boolean;

var Pts : T2DPointArray; P : TPoint; CTS, I, Hi : Integer; begin CTS := GetColorToleranceSpeed; try ColorToleranceSpeed(2); SetArrayLength(Pts, 2); for I := 0 to High(Colors) do begin FindColorsSpiralTolerance(MSCX, MSCY, Pts[0], Colors, MSx1, MSy1, MSx2, MSy2, Tol);
Pts[1] := CombineTPA(Pts[0], Pts[1]);
end;
if (Length(Pts[1]) = 0) then
begin
SRL_Warn('NFindObj', 'Could not find any colors.', -1);
Exit;
end;

Pts := SplitTPAEx(Pts[1], w, h);
SortATPAFrom(Pts, Point(MSCX, MSCY));

Hi := High(Pts);
for I := 0 to Hi do
begin
if Length(Pts) < MinCount then Continue;
P := MiddleTPA(Pts);
MMouse(P.x - 3, P.y - 3, 7, 7);
WaitRR(80, 120);
if IsUpTextMultiCustom(UpTexts) then
begin
Result := MyMouse(UpTexts);
Exit;
end;
end;
Result := False;
finally
ColorToleranceSpeed(CTS);
end;
end; TPA's For Dummys!
[*]2. DTMs/DDTMs: These are crucial becuase they are the basis of item finding and IMO one of the best map walking procedures, except reflection. An example of these:

procedure BarD(Bar: string);



var
BColor: integer;
SubPoints: array[0..3] of TDTMPointDef;
MainPoint : TDTMPointDef;
BarTDTM: TDTM;

begin
case Lowercase(bar) of
'bronze': BColor := 1451311;
'iron': BColor := 3223861;
'steel': BColor := 4802895;
'mith': BColor := 4008489;
'addy': BColor := 2831658;
'rune': BColor := 4274988;
end;
if BColor = 0 then
begin
Writeln('Bar Color was invalid choice.');
exit;
end;


MainPoint.x:=68;
MainPoint.y:=224;
MainPoint.areasize:=1
MainPoint.areashape:=0;
MainPoint.color:=BColor;
MainPoint.tolerance:=5;

SubPoints[0].x:=82;
SubPoints[0].y:=223;
SubPoints[0].areasize:=0;
SubPoints[0].areashape:=0;
SubPoints[0].color:=65536;
SubPoints[0].tolerance:=0;

SubPoints[1].x:=70;
SubPoints[1].y:=236;
SubPoints[1].areasize:=0;
SubPoints[1].areashape:=0;
SubPoints[1].color:=65536;
SubPoints[1].tolerance:=0;

SubPoints[2].x:=55;
SubPoints[2].y:=231;
SubPoints[2].areasize:=0;
SubPoints[2].areashape:=0;
SubPoints[2].color:=65536;
SubPoints[2].tolerance:=0;

SubPoints[3].x:=69;
SubPoints[3].y:=215;
SubPoints[3].areasize:=1;
SubPoints[3].areashape:=0;
SubPoints[3].color:=65536;
SubPoints[3].tolerance:=0;

BarTDTM.MainPoint := MainPoint;
BarTDTM.SubPoints := SubPoints;
BarDTM := AddDTM(BarTDTM);
end; DDTM Tutorial
[*]3. Banking: Its not necessarily advanced, but it shows your script is better. I won't go into detail on this. Its too specific.

6. The Simple Stuff, you don't think is important, but I notice and will vote no for:
• Memory Leaks: You make a memory leak, I forget how to click yes. Simple. When you declare a DTM or a Bitmap or Call a SmartGetFieldObject you MUST free it! Here is a list of the freeing procedures:

  procedure FreeDTM(DTM : Integer);

procedure FreeBitmap(Bitmap : Integer); procedure SmartFreeObject(Object : Integer);Without freeing, you can crash a script, or just eat the hell out of a computers resources while also causing a lot of lag.
• Correct Multiplayer: This should be added, it shows you know how to use logic. Its not too hard, just create a loop outside your main-loop where you switch players. Now, if you do it wrong, its worse than not at all, so be careful. Adding MultiPlayer
• AntiBan: This is crucial, its missing? NO! Antiban ranges from random coords in ALL clicking (Within Reason) and Random Waits (Within Reason) do full out AntiBan procedures. In some of my scripts, I have no antiban procedures, it is ALL in the script itself. This can be better or worse, you pick. I will not vote yes for people who use others, regardless of credit. Adding AntiBan and AntiRandom Tutorial!
• AntiRandoms: Insta-No if missing. These can be done using either reflection, SRL, or both. Here is a good procedure:

  function FindRandoms : Boolean;

begin Result := R_FindRandoms; if not Result then Result := FindNormalRandoms; if not Result then Result := ClickContinue(True, True); end; I will not vote a yes for people who do not create their own. Adding AntiBan and AntiRandom Tutorial!
• Crediting: Another instant no. If you do not credit people correctly, then its a no. Also, if more than 60% of your script is someone else's its also a no. Here is an example of crediting:

  {*******************************************************************************

function CheckQuest(Quest: string): Boolean; By: lordsaturn Description: Will return true if the quest 'Quest' is completed, and perform the action declared in 'Action'. *******************************************************************************} function CheckQuest(Quest: string; Action: fnct_ActionOptions): Boolean; var arS: TStringArray; //…
• Arrays, Dynamic and Static: I always look for good use of them. Dynamic arrays aren't always useful. But static arrays should ALWAYS be used when you have multiple variables, an example:

  // Bad:

var I, II, III, IIII, IIIII, IIIIII : Integer; begin I := 1; II := 2; III := 4; IIII := 3; IIIII := 5; IIIIII := 6; Writeln(IntToStr(I) + ', ' + IntToStr(II) + ', ' + IntToStr(III) + ', ' + IntToStr(IIII) + ', ' + IntToStr(IIIII) + ', ' + IntToStr(IIIIII)); end;

//Good:
var
  Ints : TIntegerArray;
  S : String;
  I : Integer;

begin
  Ints := [1, 2, 4, 3, 5, 6];
  
  for I := 0 to 5 do
    S := S + IntToStr(Ints[I]) + ', '

  Writeln(S);
end;

This is a poor example, as they take up similar lines, but should the array have been larger, the space saved and the length of space taken would be much greater. Also, less variables and you can use things like for loops better.
7. Reflection:
• Well, I love it. I will not vote no if you have it, though, unless you can really blow my socks off, I will not vote favorably to it.
• If you have apply with a 100 line script of reflection, I will vote no since its not advanced, you use reflection well, I will vote you a yes.

Finally, this is under-construction, if you have suggestions, please post.

Also, I will update the formatting ;).

Please let me vote more yes's :)

wonder why u turned me down!

What can I say, I'm probably too critical, but I don't like when people aren't doing their best!

Great tut Nava, I personally have never submitted a member application. I am going to wait until i have posted a couple of worthwhile scripts and can get all those things down before I even apply and I suggest this to anyone else who is going to apply for members. You should make a thread for your script and have people test and look at it to see if it has any problems. Then if its pretty good, apply with it. Simple as that!

Also, if less than 75% of your script is someone else's its also a no. Here is an example of crediting:

typo?

From: SandoS
typo?

Thanks, fixed :)

Heh, i believe people are going too light on the member apps… So, im so so with you.. :D

Cause, theres all these endless loops, functions made by other people, and stuff, and people are like, it's awsome, i vote yes! I think half of the problem is no one is really really really looking at the script…

Nice tut :) (Yay, my tut was linked)

Only one thing I don't agree with - Custom TPAs being a 'must'. IMO, it's really nice if the scripter has some, but if not, personally, I don't hold it against them. But it's your choice of course.

Rep++ :)

EDIT: @Timer, Fakawi himself said a couple months ago that we were going too hard, and now I believe it has only gotten harder.

EDIT2: Wow, I repped you recently, or maybe I just haven't repped anyone else… :(

This points out quite a bit of the things I look for too (and I think I vote no on a lot of applications too). Take note of these tips, Junior Members, and incorporate the techniques into your scripts.

http://www.villavu.com/forum/showthread.php?t=35644?t=38429

I think you need to read this…..Those are some pretty harsh standards.

I disagree slightly.

Standards should not be such a huge deal. If someone can indent so its readable then there is NO issue. I just dont understand how you can be a master programmer, and yet not put a ; on the end of all the lines. It just seems stupid to me. I DO NOT use proper standards, yet I have never had someone complain to me about readability of my code.

Readability is a must, but standards to the letter is a no.

I do agree with the compactness of scripts and not having them slide all over the place.

I dont think custom TPA's are a must. I can code an entire script that does exactly what is required without using TPA's. Yes i do use them. No they are not essential.

To me it seems we are expecting something amazing from the people that are on the outside. We expect amazing things to get into the development team, not to let you into the members area.

From: Pyro
I disagree slightly.

Standards should not be such a huge deal. If someone can indent so its readable then there is NO issue. I just dont understand how you can be a master programmer, and yet not put a ; on the end of all the lines. It just seems stupid to me. I DO NOT use proper standards, yet I have never had someone complain to me about readability of my code.

Readability is a must, but standards to the letter is a no.

I do agree with the compactness of scripts and not having them slide all over the place.

I dont think custom TPA's are a must. I can code an entire script that does exactly what is required without using TPA's. Yes i do use them. No they are not essential.

To me it seems we are expecting something amazing from the people that are on the outside. We expect amazing things to get into the development team, not to let you into the members area.

All of this, plus this: Functionality is more important than anything really. If a script functions as its meant to, regardless of what "advanced" techniques are/arent used then its a good script. This should be taken into consideration…

I just don't think you should automatically vote no on people who don't use certain methods, when its quite possible they dont because they know a simpler method or have never heard of the "proper" method before.

Fun fact: I didnt know DTMs or TPAs until long after I was SRL Members and had a master cup - proof that you dont need to know every scripting technique under the sun to be a good scripter. I didn't know cases either, the loop which actually caught Fawki's attention was a massive set of if then's inside if then's inside if then's….with something like 9 possibilities. Could of been done much easier using a case, but I obviously didn't know about it, and the logic I used to circumvent it and other things earnt me the master cup. According to this list I wouldnt have even been an SRL Member.

So in conclusion: look for talent, not for someone who can study a list and tailor a script around it to please the SRL members ;)

I agree 100% with Pyro and The Claw.

I concur with Pyro and The Claw.

Summary:
1. Standards should not be as so critical. If there is a readability problem thats different. Standards can be worked on long after ur a member, I'm still kinda working on them as a Dev.

2. Custom TPAs and DTMs were not important for getting into members before. I got in with only find colors with a well working fighter and custom functions.

From: Narcle
I concur with Pyro and The Claw.

Summary:
1. Standards should not be as so critical. If there is a readability problem thats different. Standards can be worked on long after ur a member, I'm still kinda working on them as a Dev.

2. Custom TPAs and DTMs were not important for getting into members before. I got in with only find colors with a well working fighter and custom functions.

I will agree and disagree with that.
- I agree with you concurring with Pyron and The Claw .
- I agree a script needs good (if not great) readability.
- There should be some standards in a script but not to the point of godlyness.

Here is where we disagree.
- While SRL, SCAR, and SMART advance in the community, so should the standards of education evaluation.
- You may have gotten in with only find colors and custom functions, but that was then. - Expecting what a 'good' script needs today and what a 'good' script needed … even 4 months ago will be different. …. I see it as trying to pass a cyborg today that only knows how to turn itself on and throw a stick. It is NOT helpful to creating a conducive and advanced membership team.


And now we conflict and agree.
- Nava2 consider your own membership appliance, if it is not above (not the same… but above) the level of scripting you are requiring right now it would be outrageously hypocritical of you to straightforward expect perfection in SRL membership applications.
- I agree with Nava2 in saying that membership application should be taken seriously. If the material is available to learn from and the opportunities to learn are rejected then that is the applicant's fault alone.

Finally, some of my own ideas.
- Maybe a few members should 'adopt' one or two juniors whom they see to be a promising student and tutor them in their ways. - By tutoring, I mean helping in the random question or directing to a certain tutorial. - Yet this is being done today…. not on a great scale because junior members may not know what they are missing out on, and that would explain the lack of questions with their scripts…and posting of what they feel they might be teased on.
- The standards for membership change. Rightfully so, people should be able to have a way to know what is available to learn… and what they would need to know to become a member …. this would be updated on a regular basis.

That's what I got. Don't hate my ideas… they are just opinions and thoughts of my own.

I think the big deal with standards is the "first impression" that an SRL Member gets when he or she looks at an application. What the user first sees in the script will usually tell them the quality of the script. If I look at a script that has spacing all over the place and looks very untidy, I'm going to assume that the code is just as bad. This bad first impression probably puts off a lot of people from looking at the rest of the application and therefore leads to a "no" vote.

Some of you mentioned how you think you still have bad standards also. I think all that really matters is that the code has good readability and that you stay consistent throughout the script. Weird and varied indenting, adding random begin and ends, etc. are the main problem I think people have with standards, but as long as you can stick with your style, everything's fine. There is no "law of standards", but if you want your code to be read, it's expected that other people can decipher it.

anonymity brings up a good point about the expectation level rising as more information is brought forward (for example TPAs, which were very rarely used and seemingly super advanced when I became a member). I really think that some of these techniques should be learned and applied as a user learns more, simply because the information is widely available now. There are many tutorials on TPA usage, for example, and there are a ton of competent members on the forums and IRC to help anyone out with problems or errors they may have as a result of learning the new concept. As the technologies available increase, so should the expectation level (within reason, of course).

The Claw mentions how he used a ton of nested if statements to get the job done back on his script. I really think innovation is something that should be looked for and recognized (in his case, using switch statements instead). Using inefficient coding methods is usually an indication that the user doesn't have much experience in the environment they are coding in, which means to me that they still have more to learn before becoming an SRL Member.

Anyways, those are my thoughts on the above few posts. Let me know if I made a mistake or if you have any thoughts.

Good Job putting time into this..
:)

same im hard on appz.

I agree that you should keep in mind that scripting techniques change over time. If you look at the scripts of the scripters that the founding devs of SRL looked up to, the god-fathers of SCAR scripting, they really aren't that great compared to today's scripts. RGB auto coloring, TPAs, etc didn't get popular until relatively recently (also DDTM's, but I'll let that one slide because it wasn't available back then). So many scripters that learned to script before these techniques were popular didn't get used to using them. Newer scripters however, are excepted to. This may seem unfair, that higher standards are being placed on new scripters, but without this, we would all be stuck in the stone age. We shouldn't be hearing "it's better than the script I got in with back in the day, automatic yes", or any comparisons to old apps. Just think about the current 'state of the union'.

From: Boreas
I agree that you should keep in mind that scripting techniques change over time. If you look at the scripts of the scripters that the founding devs of SRL looked up to, the god-fathers of SCAR scripting, they really aren't that great compared to today's scripts. RGB auto coloring, TPAs, etc didn't get popular until relatively recently (also DDTM's, but I'll let that one slide because it wasn't available back then). So many scripters that learned to script before these techniques were popular didn't get used to using them. Newer scripters however, are excepted to. This may seem unfair, that higher standards are being placed on new scripters, but without this, we would all be stuck in the stone age. We shouldn't be hearing "it's better than the script I got in with back in the day, automatic yes", or any comparisons to old apps. Just think about the current 'state of the union'.

I think that is the most valid thing writen in this entire thread. SCAR/SRL/Scripts must get better as Rs gets harder to auto at. We need new methods for things that couldnt be recognised with the old ones. There for, the bar must rise to produce faster, more accurate scripts.

I agree with what Boreas said.

Back when I applied to be a member, I had only been scripting about 2 weeks. I made a power miner that pretty much just used if FindColorTolerance then MMouse if IsUpText then Mouse with some fail safes and that got me in with all yes's. It was like a 305 line script, simple, with multi player and all the obviously required stuff, but it was simple.

If I applied with that script today, all the srl members would rip it apart and I would probably get all no's.

I, like the claw, didn't really know TPA's or any of that fancy crap before I was made member. Even now, I understand TPA's, but I've never written a script using them before, even though I've written some good working scripts in the past.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think standards have been raised a lot for srl members over the few years I've been here. But I think that we should look for good running scripts over good looking scripts. TPA's are great and stuff, but if 1 member uses TPA's and the script works okay, and another doesn't but their script works great, who's really the better scripter?

From: richk1693
http://www.villavu.com/forum/showthread.php?t=35644?t=38429

I think you need to read this…..Those are some pretty harsh standards.

No, I disagree with the Fawk on this one. I think that the standard for an SRL member needs to increase. Its a right, and a deserved one. I'm not harsh, I'm a realist.

From: Pyro
I disagree slightly.

Standards should not be such a huge deal. If someone can indent so its readable then there is NO issue. I just dont understand how you can be a master programmer, and yet not put a ; on the end of all the lines. It just seems stupid to me. I DO NOT use proper standards, yet I have never had someone complain to me about readability of my code.

Readability is a must, but standards to the letter is a no.

I do agree with the compactness of scripts and not having them slide all over the place.

I dont think custom TPA's are a must. I can code an entire script that does exactly what is required without using TPA's. Yes i do use them. No they are not essential.

To me it seems we are expecting something amazing from the people that are on the outside. We expect amazing things to get into the development team, not to let you into the members area.

Readability is key, I apologize, I didn't mean to be so… harsh on it I guess, I meant to say that it is very very very important, and it makes me wnat to help and read it. Since its not a chore to read through poor standards.

Amazing is relative, I don't see amazing apps (usually) I see mediocre and poor. Sometimes there are good apps. Good apps are ones which follow most if not all of the guide lines I laid out and I do vote no.

My biggest push to vote yes is attitude.

From: The Claw
All of this, plus this: Functionality is more important than anything really. If a script functions as its meant to, regardless of what "advanced" techniques are/arent used then its a good script. This should be taken into consideration…

I just don't think you should automatically vote no on people who don't use certain methods, when its quite possible they dont because they know a simpler method or have never heard of the "proper" method before.

Fun fact: I didnt know DTMs or TPAs until long after I was SRL Members and had a master cup - proof that you dont need to know every scripting technique under the sun to be a good scripter. I didn't know cases either, the loop which actually caught Fawki's attention was a massive set of if then's inside if then's inside if then's….with something like 9 possibilities. Could of been done much easier using a case, but I obviously didn't know about it, and the logic I used to circumvent it and other things earnt me the master cup. According to this list I wouldnt have even been an SRL Member.

So in conclusion: look for talent, not for someone who can study a list and tailor a script around it to please the SRL members ;)

I disagree, you were in at a "simpler" time. You didn't need to know the advanced techniques. Macros with the new runescape require new skills. These skills need to be part of those who develop the better scripts. And those who are willing to learn them deserve to be recognize for it.

I agree with looking for talent, but I disagree with ignoring things for it.

Last time I checked, you can't get good grades in university if you hand write everything and have white-out covering the page where you made mistakes.

From: Boreas
I agree that you should keep in mind that scripting techniques change over time. If you look at the scripts of the scripters that the founding devs of SRL looked up to, the god-fathers of SCAR scripting, they really aren't that great compared to today's scripts. RGB auto coloring, TPAs, etc didn't get popular until relatively recently (also DDTM's, but I'll let that one slide because it wasn't available back then). So many scripters that learned to script before these techniques were popular didn't get used to using them. Newer scripters however, are excepted to. This may seem unfair, that higher standards are being placed on new scripters, but without this, we would all be stuck in the stone age. We shouldn't be hearing "it's better than the script I got in with back in the day, automatic yes", or any comparisons to old apps. Just think about the current 'state of the union'.

There should be a "dynamic equilibrium" of sorts which will increase as the need increases. RuneScape is getting more and more complicated, scripting gets harder and harder, the old scripts just aren't acceptable anymore and new ones need to be developed. P.S. I agree. :)

From: Nava2
No, I disagree with the Fawk on this one. I think that the standard for an SRL member needs to increase. Its a right, and a deserved one. I'm not harsh, I'm a realist.

I think it has more to do with your ego… Self proclaimed "hard-ass"

From: JAD
I think it has more to do with your ego… Self proclaimed "hard-ass"

No offense, taken, but no offense intended by the following, but you don't even know me? How can you make that assumption?

Edit: It's not self-proclaimed, I have been told this by at least two people if not more, and I figure I might as well try and HELP the ones who need it. This seemed like a good idea. If you disagree feel free to navigate away.

From: JAD
I think it has more to do with your ego… Self proclaimed "hard-ass"

So his opinion doesn't matter because Fawki said otherwise in a thread made how long ago? Hardly a justification to call him a "hard ass."

From: Nava2
No offense, taken, but no offense intended by the following, but you don't even know me? How can you make that assumption?

Because that's how the typical srl member seems to be right now, and from what I gathered from this post, you seem to be the same. I think it's sad that all the SRL members are up on their high horse because they have a little bit of power thinking they're mr. big shot because they can decide somebody's fate. And if they vote yes to make somebody a member, then that new member has just as much power as them, and that makes them feel less powerful.

I shouldn't have said anything, but I just think that the average srl member's attitude is changing for the worse.

Sorry, I'll navigate away now.

@Narcle, he said he's a hard-ass in his post… I wasn't calling him one.

From: JAD
Because that's how the typical srl member seems to be right now, and from what I gathered from this post, you seem to be the same. I think it's sad that all the SRL members are up on their high horse because they have a little bit of power thinking they're mr. big shot because they can decide somebody's fate. And if they vote yes to make somebody a member, then that new member has just as much power as them, and that makes them feel less powerful.

I shouldn't have said anything, but I just think that the average srl member's attitude is changing for the worse.

Sorry, I'll navigate away now.

@Narcle, he said he's a hard-ass in his post… I wasn't calling him one.

Did he? Missed that bit.

Well the "hard ass-ness" and "high horse" is being passed along. Its been gradually getting harder to be a SRL-Member so like myself and those who have voted before, we can only blame ourselves for passing this down the line. That's my thought.

From: JAD
Because that's how the typical srl member seems to be right now, and from what I gathered from this post, you seem to be the same. I think it's sad that all the SRL members are up on their high horse because they have a little bit of power thinking they're mr. big shot because they can decide somebody's fate. And if they vote yes to make somebody a member, then that new member has just as much power as them, and that makes them feel less powerful.

I shouldn't have said anything, but I just think that the average srl member's attitude is changing for the worse.

Sorry, I'll navigate away now.

@Narcle, he said he's a hard-ass in his post… I wasn't calling him one.

Well, frankly, assuming makes an ass out of you and me, or in this case, you.

I am more than willing to help ANYONE who asks me. I take time out of my day to help others, and teach them. I have a passion for it, and enjoy it. This post was meant to get peoples attention, its true. I am harsh on apps, but only becuase I want people todo better. Maybe it was how I was brought up, maybe its my want to see them flourish. I just don't believe people deserve to be commended for doing little work and putting little effort in. Most people like that are also only in it for the scripts available.

Are those the people you really want to let in? Or do you want the people who enjoy this community, and find it a hobby. Rather than who are in it for the little gold pixels.

@Narcle… What'd you mean? xD

From: Nava2
@Narcle… What'd you mean? xD

Because I was hard on giving my vote say to you to become a SRL-Member. You continue this to the next person that has put a app in. Then when one gets in they do this and etc. etc.

From: Narcle
Because I was hard on giving my vote say to you to become a SRL-Member. You continue this to the next person that has put a app in. Then when one gets in they do this and etc. etc.

Its a chain, and the standards to get in increase. Most of what I posted is current and should be required. Most, not all.

From: JAD
Because that's how the typical srl member seems to be right now, and from what I gathered from this post, you seem to be the same. I think it's sad that all the SRL members are up on their high horse because they have a little bit of power thinking they're mr. big shot because they can decide somebody's fate. And if they vote yes to make somebody a member, then that new member has just as much power as them, and that makes them feel less powerful.

I shouldn't have said anything, but I just think that the average srl member's attitude is changing for the worse.

You seem to be up on your own high horse with these posts. He made a legit thread stating why he votes no, trying to help out junior members, then you start telling him that he has too much of an ego. This whole post strikes me as very hypocritical, since you are, in that post, everything you are accusing him of.

I know Nava2. He doesn't have a big ego. He's just trying to help.

From: Nava2
Well, frankly, assuming makes an ass out of you and me, or in this case, you.

I am more than willing to help ANYONE who asks me. I take time out of my day to help others, and teach them. I have a passion for it, and enjoy it. This post was meant to get peoples attention, its true. I am harsh on apps, but only becuase I want people todo better. Maybe it was how I was brought up, maybe its my want to see them flourish. I just don't believe people deserve to be commended for doing little work and putting little effort in. Most people like that are also only in it for the scripts available.

Are those the people you really want to let in? Or do you want the people who enjoy this community, and find it a hobby. Rather than who are in it for the little gold pixels.

@Narcle… What'd you mean? xD

I shouldn't have made that assumption about you, but I just based it on what I read.

But that's exactly it. People shouldn't be commended for doing little work and putting little effort in. What they should be commended for is hard work with lots of effort. But what I'm saying is that some people will completely discard that the applyee tried hard and has a good script just because of bad standards or no TPA's. They go by a check list, and they go strictly by that list.

Again, sorry for making that comment and assumption about you, but I think that maybe you need to soften up your ass a little bit.

TBH. To say claw came in earlier when scripting was less advanced is not quite true. By the time claw entered i was already not actively scripting huge scripts anymore.

I guess you could say i came in pretty early. I was the first "non founder" dev i guess you could say. But still i have kept up with the times.

I will agree that scripting has come a long way since back then. But the fact remains that logic is the key to a good script.

I just think what fawki posted IS what should be expected. I dont care if you are the master at TPA's but a complete jackass, dont intend to help the community, never intend to contribute etc.

Without revealing too much i can tell you now, people DO get rejected say from the development team. Because others feel that although they are good scripters, they wont really contribute much or work hard to further SRL.

From: JAD
I shouldn't have made that assumption about you, but I just based it on what I read.

But that's exactly it. People shouldn't be commended for doing little work and putting little effort in. What they should be commended for is hard work with lots of effort. But what I'm saying is that some people will completely discard that the applyee tried hard and has a good script just because of bad standards or no TPA's. They go by a check list, and they go strictly by that list.

Again, sorry for making that comment and assumption about you, but I think that maybe you need to soften up your ass a little bit.

Eh, with regards to softening, to each their own. I vote my way, you vote yours. :) Democracy at its finest.

From: Pyro
TBH. To say claw came in earlier when scripting was less advanced is not quite true. By the time claw entered i was already not actively scripting huge scripts anymore.

I guess you could say i came in pretty early. I was the first "non founder" dev i guess you could say. But still i have kept up with the times.

I will agree that scripting has come a long way since back then. But the fact remains that logic is the key to a good script.

I just think what fawki posted IS what should be expected. I dont care if you are the master at TPA's but a complete jackass, dont intend to help the community, never intend to contribute etc.

Without revealing too much i can tell you now, people DO get rejected say from the development team. Because others feel that although they are good scripters, they wont really contribute much or work hard to further SRL.

To be honest, I didn't put enough emphasis on attitude. I have voted yes for kids who have a mediocre script but a great attitude to learn, also have done the opposite. Kids with amazing scripts and a poor attitude get a no from me.

It's more key than I put emphasis on. That is my mistake.

Btw, I agree fully with the SRL Dev team, but isn't that a bit redundant with regards to SRL membership being discussed? Sorry, just seems like the same case, different situation.

Also, I think you are reading too into the "simpler time" thing. What I meant was, he was advanced, just advanced for his time. Not for todays times. If someone applied with the scripts of the past, its would be an instant no by almost anyone.

If i add some TPA's And back up radial walking or some other walking procedure, would you vote yes on Iron man?

From: zasz
If i add some TPA's And back up radial walking or some other walking procedure, would you vote yes on Iron man?

I would have to take a look, remember this is merely a guideline. (:

It's OK to share your decision, but it voids the point of voting if you tell other people how you arrived at that conclusion.

TPAs are not a requirement! It's a freaking array just like anything, if they are used and they want extra points for it, they must use them very well, base voting somewhat on how advanced the script is, which you can only tell when you see it.

@nava. Same situation. You want someone to contribute to SRL right? So vote for someone who will…. Only difference is

Dev : yes to someone who will update include

Members: Yes to someone who will give to the community with tuts, scripting help and scripts.

The right attitude + a working script (little bit more advanced than auto-talker ofcourse) = Yes..

I don't see why people should use technique's they don't understand. What's the point of using TPA's when you don't understand them..
Rather combine technique's you understand to a working script. If your willing to learn, the other stuff will come later..

If your script works without custom TPA's then why should someone include them into their script to appease the members? Seems harsh to me. If a script is functional and the person contributes to the community, then I would vote yes, although I agree with you about the redundant proc's in some scripts. People vote yes on scripts that contain alot of redundant coding and I ask myself why.

scripting has gotten more complex, therefore we accept people who can create more complex scripts, ofc our standards are getting higher.

Awesome tutorial.
Really makes things clear, good work! :)

Good thread Nava2, but I have always voted and I will continue to vote for people that show:

1. …good attitude. This is my prime concern. This is what makes this community a great community. Attitude is all. All we do is silenty read each others thoughts. It's the only way we communicate with each other. We do not hear, see nor feel each others presence. Therefore it is crucial that you speak your truth "quietly and nicely" to quote myself. SRL is nice for now, attitude is for life!
2. …a properly formatted working Pascal/SCAR/SRL script. Do not think lightly about this, since this usually means:
• The applicant has mastered the principles of Pascal. To most applicants, this is their first ever attempt in programming, and for most this doesn't come easy, so I deeply respect every applicants perseverance. Mastering the flow of programming, comprehending the complexity of data structure, functions, procedures, declarations etc, is an achievement in itself. It will change the way the applicant looks at computers and programs for the rest of their lifes.
• The applicant has mastered the principles of SCAR. Now while in itself this may look obvious to everyone in this community, I remember my awe when I managed to get a script working for the first time. It is only because I knew for certain it was possible, others could do it, so why couldn't I?, so I tried and tried and tried until I finally got it.
• The applicant has mastered the principles of SRL. This also may look completely obvious to all of you, yet it is by far the most difficult task ahead. SRL is a swamp and has its own unique way of handling RS. There are many different levels SRL operates. Showing you have mastered the basic functionality is more than enough for me. It means the applicant has run SRL scripts, copied from, assembled his/her's own functions, read a lot of tuts, generally speaking has spent hours and hours behind the screen to get things finally more or less right. Look at my old Ratz! script. It is a hog, but I still regard it as my best script ever. There is nothing much really "complicated" going on there. In principle it is a very basic script, but with a lot of creativity. Which brings me to the third point:
3. …creativity. This is maybe not so much a condition, but a weakness of mine. I just love creative scripters. Even if a applicant shows a hint of creativity inside an application, I am applauding by the sideline and pushing yes by default. IMHO creative minds is what we need more than pure coders. I have always chosen creative minds around me. They are the founding fathers of SRL.

So you see, I have a basically different approach to things. Maybe its my age, but maybe it's because I see all that hard work someone has invested. From a playing consuming mentality towards an active challenging controlling mentality takes a lot of perseverance. It will change the (young) applicants life for ever.

Well said :D

Attitude is always important. If someone has a good attitude (willingness to learn, respectful of others, etc.), they always contribute back whatever they can, and always do the best they can. Personally, the time I really started learning how to script well was while i was an SRL-Member. My application script was fairly simple, and I learned more advanced stuff as a Member.

Didn't get to read through the whole post (let alone the whole thread) yet, but just a quick note that your 'if' examples in #3 are missing indents after the else statements.

From: WT-Fakawi

• …creativity. This is maybe not so much a condition, but a weakness of mine. I just love creative scripters. Even if a applicant shows a hint of creativity inside an application, I am applauding by the sideline and pushing yes by default. IMHO creative minds is what we need more than pure coders. I have always chosen creative minds around me. They are the founding fathers of SRL.

I agree. Unfortunately, there seems to be too much "structure" in scripts. A "this is what I need to do to accomplish this" type of attitude. For the most part, it's the same things over and over, just to do different things. For example, object finding. TPAs have become the de-facto in object finding, and nobody really strays from using them anymore. One person may use "FindColorsTolerance," sort the resulting TPA, and move to a tree; another person may do the exact same thing, but to move to a rock. I don't really see too much creativity often.

some tutorials are outdated :p

From: WT-Fakawi
Good thread Nava2, but I have always voted and I will continue to vote for people that show:

1. …good attitude. This is my prime concern. This is what makes this community a great community. Attitude is all. All we do is silenty read each others thoughts. It's the only way we communicate with each other. We do not hear, see nor feel each others presence. Therefore it is crucial that you speak your truth "quietly and nicely" to quote myself. SRL is nice for now, attitude is for life!
2. …a properly formatted working Pascal/SCAR/SRL script. Do not think lightly about this, since this usually means:
• The applicant has mastered the principles of Pascal. To most applicants, this is their first ever attempt in programming, and for most this doesn't come easy, so I deeply respect every applicants perseverance. Mastering the flow of programming, comprehending the complexity of data structure, functions, procedures, declarations etc, is an achievement in itself. It will change the way the applicant looks at computers and programs for the rest of their lifes.
• The applicant has mastered the principles of SCAR. Now while in itself this may look obvious to everyone in this community, I remember my awe when I managed to get a script working for the first time. It is only because I knew for certain it was possible, others could do it, so why couldn't I?, so I tried and tried and tried until I finally got it.
• The applicant has mastered the principles of SRL. This also may look completely obvious to all of you, yet it is by far the most difficult task ahead. SRL is a swamp and has its own unique way of handling RS. There are many different levels SRL operates. Showing you have mastered the basic functionality is more than enough for me. It means the applicant has run SRL scripts, copied from, assembled his/her's own functions, read a lot of tuts, generally speaking has spent hours and hours behind the screen to get things finally more or less right. Look at my old Ratz! script. It is a hog, but I still regard it as my best script ever. There is nothing much really "complicated" going on there. In principle it is a very basic script, but with a lot of creativity. Which brings me to the third point:
3. …creativity. This is maybe not so much a condition, but a weakness of mine. I just love creative scripters. Even if a applicant shows a hint of creativity inside an application, I am applauding by the sideline and pushing yes by default. IMHO creative minds is what we need more than pure coders. I have always chosen creative minds around me. They are the founding fathers of SRL.

So you see, I have a basically different approach to things. Maybe its my age, but maybe it's because I see all that hard work someone has invested. From a playing consuming mentality towards an active challenging controlling mentality takes a lot of perseverance. It will change the (young) applicants life for ever.

I have a lot of respect for you and your opinions. The main point of this thread has been lost though.

I regret naming it as I did. I thought it would be a more direct approach to the subject.

Anyways, I think you have valid points, although I will not change how I vote, I do take all of those things into consideration.

Attitude is my biggest thing, secondly standards, sound familiar? :) But, I do look for advanced techniques and efficiency. That's just who I am.

Anyways, I agree completely with you, but I won't change how I vote based on it. Hey, its not called a democratic vote for nothing. ;)

From: Smartzkid
Didn't get to read through the whole post (let alone the whole thread) yet, but just a quick note that your 'if' examples in #3 are missing indents after the else statements.

Hmm, that's a matter of preference. If I added all the indents in then its more messy than leaving them out. I guess I should put them in…

From: bullzeye95
I agree. Unfortunately, there seems to be too much "structure" in scripts. A "this is what I need to do to accomplish this" type of attitude. For the most part, it's the same things over and over, just to do different things. For example, object finding. TPAs have become the de-facto in object finding, and nobody really strays from using them anymore. One person may use "FindColorsTolerance," sort the resulting TPA, and move to a tree; another person may do the exact same thing, but to move to a rock. I don't really see too much creativity often.

Hmm, very very true. I loved that one tree finder you used. But there are other options that many people just don't explore. Things like colour records and general GetColors, or even Bitmaps and canvas'. Not sure how, but I'm sure its possible ;).

I remember you had that one FindTree procedure that was better than TPAs?

Sounds like quite a usefull thread, I'll be sure to run my script past this as if it were a checklist before submitting it :garfield:

Im gonna try doing something verry good…

From: killhack95
Im gonna try doing something verry good…

It is very nice to see people reading this still. :)

From: Nava2
It is very nice to see people reading this still. :)

I pretty much based my app to this guide :D

From: mormonman
I pretty much based my app to this guide :D

hey, same with me :p

From: akwardsaw
hey, same with me :p

And I voted yes on yours…

From: mormonman
I pretty much based my app to this guide :D

And I tried to help you on yours…. xD

From: Nava2
And I voted yes on yours…

well, i ment that i tried my best to base it ;)

stickyfied.

~RM

NavaNoob :p, so you voted no on my application ?

Just kidding, i love it :)

From: Nava2
Attitude:
I have voted no purely on attitude

From: Nava2
Sloppy Standards
This is also the main reason why I will vote NO!

From: Nava2
Large If statements
These are a key reason I vote no

From: Nava2
Inefficient Code.
This is a large reason why I vote no.

you confuzzled me :(

~shut

How so? And I think this is one of my first stickied tuts! :)

wow well this has been an intresting read and one i wont start a debate off again, but good tutorial, but to a cirtain degree standards are essential but to a new programmer (they dont know standards)

I will be applying for membership after make a few scritps - i say few so give me sometime

program New;
begin
end.

pl0x v0t3 yesh kk????? i r nub script0r n i cantz script. ^^

Well done Nava, love this guide.

This needs a good bump, helped me get members, and have now referred new people to it.

Thanks Nava! This will help me a lot in my future scripts. :)
Plus Srl member sounds nice. lol

From: Kehmist
Thanks Nava! This will help me a lot in my future scripts. :)
Plus Srl member sounds nice. lol

This guide GOT me members :) (My vote ratio was something like 13 yes - 1 no)

From: cstrike
This guide GOT me members :) (My vote ratio was something like 13 yes - 1 no)

:D Awesome.

Yes, this was one (I think there were 2) of the guides I looked at also to get me SRL Membership. A (VERY) delayed thanks to you…

What is the opinion on using SPS? DTM walking is much more difficult than it used to be because of the minimap color shifts.

Check this out, I had the same exact concern as you: http://villavu.com/forum/showthread.php?t=68106

From: legoace
What is the opinion on using SPS? DTM walking is much more difficult than it used to be because of the minimap color shifts.

Bump

Found this post very helpful! I want to apply for members eventually, gonna go through my code all over again :P


Thanks buddy, really good guide. (should stay at the top of the forums :D)

Fantastic guide, thanks a lot for posting, really helpful :)
I probably wouldn't of found those tutorials if i hadn't read this guide :P

Regarding SPS etc, I recently started using SPS AND OBJDTM. Why? Because they have different practicalities.. for example, ObjDTM's are GREAT but i notice they do mess up ever now and again when the enviroment your in is very similar… (Woodland area's).

At times like this I use SPS but when theres closer areas like in Varrock etc with ladders etc I used DTMS. I don't use Radial for a reason…I tried it and didn't feel comfortable using it. At the end of the day im supposed to show a variety of skills… show that i try more than one thing… and I have now, I've improved all my previous scripts since my last SRL application I've also released 2 scripts in 1 day.. I'm working on a nature rune crafter (with a twist).
So yes I feel I have improved. My standards have, so have my scripts.

The problem I find with some of the members of SRL is that a lot of them are too stern on personal choice. Looking back i agree i have my faults… but the personal choice of walking method's shouldn't cater for their choice.

I also had a debate about how long members had to be here before they could really apply for SRL. Now. After a long few posts it was confirmed that although not official. people still consider it and SOME argue it like I did.

You may feel your ready but remember your trying to cater for everyone in your application and to full-fill what people require of you. So don't feel completely down if you don't agree. At the end of the day the community here is just trying to keep it a happy forum.

From: xtrapsp
Regarding SPS etc, I recently started using SPS AND OBJDTM. Why? Because they have different practicalities.. for example, ObjDTM's are GREAT but i notice they do mess up ever now and again when the enviroment your in is very similar… (Woodland area's).

At times like this I use SPS but when theres closer areas like in Varrock etc with ladders etc I used DTMS. I don't use Radial for a reason…I tried it and didn't feel comfortable using it. At the end of the day im supposed to show a variety of skills… show that i try more than one thing… and I have now, I've improved all my previous scripts since my last SRL application I've also released 2 scripts in 1 day.. I'm working on a nature rune crafter (with a twist).
So yes I feel I have improved. My standards have, so have my scripts.

The problem I find with some of the members of SRL is that a lot of them are too stern on personal choice. Looking back i agree i have my faults… but the personal choice of walking method's shouldn't cater for their choice.

I also had a debate about how long members had to be here before they could really apply for SRL. Now. After a long few posts it was confirmed that although not official. people still consider it and SOME argue it like I did.

You may feel your ready but remember your trying to cater for everyone in your application and to full-fill what people require of you. So don't feel completely down if you don't agree. At the end of the day the community here is just trying to keep it a happy forum.

I don't fully agree. An app is meant to show your knowledge of the SRL include, and to demonstrate that, you may need to show you have a strong grasp on the multiple different walking methods. All of them are more useful in different areas so, its not personal choice, but whet fits best with the area. None of the walking methods are reliable everywhere.

From: m34tcode
I don't fully agree. An app is meant to show your knowledge of the SRL include, and to demonstrate that, you may need to show you have a strong grasp on the multiple different walking methods. All of them are more useful in different areas so, its not personal choice, but whet fits best with the area. None of the walking methods are reliable everywhere.

I meant that to :P

(Went off on a rant a little and didn't explain properly, obviously :P)

xtrapsp, I (though not completely) agree.

However personal choice is what usually stops people from getting members(the good apps). There are three things that should get you in:

- Longevity over 2 months
- Activity over 80%
- A fully working script showing advanced methods.

Have them three and you're more than likely to get in unless your standards are so poor the you indent every line and just keep going… so your script ends up looking like a really pointy nose… yikes!

EDIT: Oh and a good attitude - crucial

From: abu_jwka
xtrapsp, I (though not completely) agree.

However personal choice is what usually stops people from getting members(the good apps). There are three things that should get you in:

- Longevity over 2 months
- Activity over 80%
- A fully working script showing advanced methods.

Have them three and you're more than likely to get in unless your standards are so poor the you indent every line and just keep going… so your script ends up looking like a really pointy nose… yikes!

EDIT: Oh and a good attitude - crucial

See this is where my little chat about personal views comes in :P because you don't agree :P

I can't 100% comment.. i've been rejected twice. According to the rules I could apply RIGHT NOW. Today has been 1 month… I'm going to wait though. I have all 3 of those you said. However I need to update ALL my scripts (All the ones I release to public ARE NOT finished…)

Great read, good for people who want to become a member. :)

From: xtrapsp
See this is where my little chat about personal views comes in :P because you don't agree :P

I can't 100% comment.. i've been rejected twice. According to the rules I could apply RIGHT NOW. Today has been 1 month… I'm going to wait though. I have all 3 of those you said. However I need to update ALL my scripts (All the ones I release to public ARE NOT finished…)

Why you need to update all of them? 1 script is enough for application and I personally prefer people with 1 high quality script over multiple mid/low quality scripts.

From: weequ
Why you need to update all of them? 1 script is enough for application and I personally prefer people with 1 high quality script over multiple mid/low quality scripts.

Or 3 high quality scripts


:3 im not trying to blow my own horn but i got 19 yes 0 no by using this guide and using different scripts to show different methods… i choose sps over any other walking method. But i showed eagerness to look at other methods and try them

I'm bumping this because I think people don't actually read member's applications anymore.

From: tls
I'm bumping this because I think people don't actually read member's applications anymore.

So after reading 3 guides about member applications I see your post!

Doesn't matter, I would rather take my time to create a script that contains these points.